J's Associates, LLC ( 47PD0120Q0001)

B-418546 Jun 10, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Trademasters Service, Inc., a small business of Lorton, Virginia, protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 47PD0120Q0001, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for facilities, engineering, operation, and maintenance services at a GSA regional office building. The protester alleges that the RFQ does not provide sufficient information to permit vendors to compete intelligently and fairly. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  Trademasters Service, Inc. File:  B-418546 Date:  June 10, 2020 Timothy F. Valley, Esq., Jason A. Blindauer, Esq., and Meghan F. Leemon, Esq., Piliero Mazza PLLC, for the protester. Robert Notigan, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Michael Willems, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that solicitation deprives vendors of the ability to compete intelligently is denied where the record shows that the solicitation is drafted in a fashion that enables vendors to intelligently prepare their proposals and is sufficiently free from ambiguity so that vendors may compete on a common basis. DECISION   Trademasters Service, Inc., a small business of Lorton, Virginia, protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 47PD0120Q0001, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for facilities, engineering, operation, and maintenance services at a GSA regional office building.  The protester alleges that the RFQ does not provide sufficient information to permit vendors to compete intelligently and fairly. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFQ, issued on November 27, 2019, sought quotations from holders of GSA’s Federal Supply Schedule No. 03FAC (Facilities Maintenance and Management) contracts, to establish a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) for facilities maintenance services under the rules prescribed in Federal Acquisition Regulation 8.405-3.  Agency Report (AR), exh. 2, Amended RFQ at 6.[1]  Specifically, the RFQ calls for the provision of facilities engineering, operation and maintenance, and related services for a GSA regional office building located in Washington, D.C., over the term of one base year and nine, 1-year option periods.  Id. The solicitation contemplates the issuance of a single BPA on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering the following non-price factors, listed in descending order of importance:  management plan, prior experience, and past performance.  Id. at 10-11.  The RFQ also provides that non-price factors, when combined, are more important than price.  Id.  On December 18, the agency held a pre-quotation conference and site visit for prospective vendors to tour and inspect the building, and following the site visit, the agency received and answered vendor questions.  See generally AR, exh. 5, Regional Office Building Questions and Answers (Q&A), and exh. 13, Pre-Quotation Conference and Site Visit Meeting Minutes.  The solicitation closed on March 6, and the agency received twelve quotations, including one from the protester.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 6.  Also on March 6, prior to the closing time, Trademasters filed its protest with our Office challenging the terms of the solicitation.  DISCUSSION The protester argues that the RFQ deprives vendors of the ability to compete intelligently and fairly because the solicitation is missing material information, is unnecessarily confusing and duplicative, and impermissibly seeks to shift all the risk of the missing and confusing information to the contractor.  Protest at 3-8.  Specifically, the protester points to various “informational deficiencies” in the solicitation, and to several instances where the firm argues the solicitation provides insufficient information to permit a vendor to intelligently estimate its price, or devise an effective management plan.  Protest at 4-6. The agency responds that while specifications must be sufficiently clear to permit competition on an intelligent and equal basis, “there is no requirement that a solicitation be so detailed as to eliminate all performance uncertainties.”  Memorandum of Law at 1.  The agency also asserts that “[s]ome risk is inherent in most types of contracts, and offerors are expected, when computing their prices, to account for such risk.”  Id.  Moreover, while recognizing that “there is bound to be some incomplete information[,]” the agency argues that “[t]hose minimal uncertainties do not rise to the level of material deficiencies.”  Id.